Right, a century that's only a dozen years old. Cool for the little kids out there who only know comics from the last 10 years or so, or most likely just the movies, not so much for most of us who've seen a little more mileage than that. I agree that Spider-Man should be kept to his own franchise. It's a much better fit for the web-slinger, and the Avengers has had so many great members throughout the years that there are plenty of other cool ones to utilize.

Right, a century that's only a dozen years old. Cool for the little kids out there who only know comics from the last 10 years or so, or most likely just the movies, not so much for most of us who've seen a little more mileage than that. I agree that Spider-Man should be kept to his own franchise. It's a much better fit for the web-slinger, and the Avengers has had so many great members throughout the years that there are plenty of other cool ones to utilize.

Little kids read comics?

Despite how polarizing Bendis' All-Star take on Avengers is received by vocal fans, there's no Avenger more popular than Spider-Man. The only reason Spidey isn't and won't be on the Avengers is because Sony and Marvel Studios could never come to a monetary agreement that would work for both of them. If they could, best believe 'the kid' would be on the team.

I also said "or most likely just the movies," as in they are only familiar with these characters because of the movies, Spider-Man being huge. I agree with ya about the monetary agreement though, it's all about the greenbacks, and I'm sure Sony would love to get a slice of the Avenger's payout. Eh, who knows, it's a great time for us fans regardless. I guess I was just throwing in my two cents stating that I'm just a more old-school Avengers line-up kinda guy. Me personally, I'd rather have someone like Beast over Spider-Man on the roster. Which of course will never happen either.

I did too, but that's not how it is anymore, especially not for stuff like New Avengers. Maybe teenagers, I guess, but mostly, young adults. I personally think the Avengers franchise should take the best from all Avengers comics, not just a certain era, I think that's what Avengers 1 did.

Quote:

Originally Posted by I'm Venom

Sony could get 5% of the profit for licensing Spider-Man to Disney/Marvel.

Why would Disney give up 5% of the profit for their billion dollar franchise in order to gain access to a character from a less successful franchise?

Would Sony be happy with 5% for letting Disney use their most profitable character? Or would they feel like Spider-Man would increase the box office take of Avengers more than 5% and they'd be getting gipped?

It'd be different if there was some way to tell how much Spidey would add, but it's all guess work, and Sony is going to guess more and Disney less by nature.

Would Sony be happy with 5% for letting Disney use their most profitable character? Or would they feel like Spider-Man would increase the box office take of Avengers more than 5% and they'd be getting gipped?

It would make enough cash to spread around, and you'd think that the terms would be pretty simple, but honestly, why would Sony not be down for letting Spidey being in Avengers 2? Not forcing it, because I like Spidey as the hero fighting on the streets day to day than him as part of a team, but it makes sense to me for them to actually do so. They're not spending money.

Like I said, if they think Disney is going to make 50M off of Spidey, and Sony's only getting 20M for licencing him out, they're not going to go for it. For a businessperson, that's like giving away free money. Business-wise it'd be better to just keep the character so that Sony's the only place you can get Spidey on film, keep the demand high, and use the fact that the public hasn't seen Spidey since the last Spidey movie to make 50M.

Right, a century that's only a dozen years old. Cool for the little kids out there who only know comics from the last 10 years or so, or most likely just the movies, not so much for most of us who've seen a little more mileage than that. I agree that Spider-Man should be kept to his own franchise. It's a much better fit for the web-slinger, and the Avengers has had so many great members throughout the years that there are plenty of other cool ones to utilize.

As a 46-year old longtime comic aficionado, I feel where you're coming from; but you've got to understand that Marvel Studios is trying to appeal to a much younger crowd than us, and that includes kids as a prime target (they're the ones who buy/pester Mommy for all the merch).

I've spent a lot of time thinking about my ideal Avengers lineup, and although I have to cut down the members by one or two, one thing I do know: Ms Marvel should be on the team.

I love Black Widow. But every girl I know was disappointed in the choice of the only female if there was only going to be one. The thing is, when you've got an all-star superhero lineup, you want at least one of the female heros to feel like a all-star superhero. You want one of them to be a brightly colored powerhouse. Ms. Marvel is one of the best that the Marvel Universe has, as she's not connected to any (famous) male superhero, has a great personality, and feels like wonder woman and has a great potential mythology (Kree and Sword). Then Black Widow works well to balance her out in the group. She and Black Widow are sort of the female Superman and Batman of the Avengers.

Falcon -Pretty much a given at this point.
Ms. Marvel -I think the S.H.I.E.L.D. show is a perfect opportunity to capitalize on this
Black Panther -In my opinion I think Panther is a must.

Now characters I wouldn't mind see go:

Hulk -hey, he was never around much anyways.
Black Widow -she's cool, but I wouldn't be sad if she went somewhere else.
Nick Fury -If Whedon killed anyone, I'd want it to be Fury, only to find out he faked
his own death for one super-spy reason or another.

I've been reading since I was 6. My Dad (who is 52 now) was reading them at the age of 5.

As you can see from my quote, I was referring to the New Avengers comics, but more generally, little kids in this decade don't read comics, which is why we have a lot of "I started reading when I was little" by twenty+ somethings, but if you go to the comic shop, you won't see many kids ever. This is a well known issue in the industry. And I hope that kids always do read comics, but unless the industry starts catering to and recruiting children as hard as it has adults, they'll continue to be a smaller and smaller part of the industry.

As you can see from my quote, I was referring to the New Avengers comics, but more generally, little kids in this decade don't read comics, which is why we have a lot of "I started reading when I was little" by twenty+ somethings, but if you go to the comic shop, you won't see many kids ever. This is a well known issue in the industry. And I hope that kids always do read comics, but unless the industry starts catering to and recruiting children as hard as it has adults, they'll continue to be a smaller and smaller part of the industry.

That's why putting out quality cartoons is so important now. I grew up reading few comics but watching lots of cartoons. Along with many superhero fans of my generation, I am most familiar with these characters because I loved the animated series of X-Men, Spider-Man, and Batman in the 90s, not because I read their comics. To this day, I don't read comics very often, but I do still follow and watch the new Marvel and DC cartoons that are being produced. And that's why I hate hate hate that Loeb is in charge of Marvel TV right now.

Anyway, back on topic, I'd love to see Black Panther, Ms. Marvel, and Ant-Man/Wasp join the team, sooner than later.

Like I said, if they think Disney is going to make 50M off of Spidey, and Sony's only getting 20M for licencing him out, they're not going to go for it. For a businessperson, that's like giving away free money. Business-wise it'd be better to just keep the character so that Sony's the only place you can get Spidey on film, keep the demand high, and use the fact that the public hasn't seen Spidey since the last Spidey movie to make 50M.

I imagine that Sony would want to get in on that Avengers hype/money. I see no reason why they wouldn't let Marvel use him in a movie. Also, there's the possibility that including him could boost the marketability of the Amazing Spider-Man film series. If subsequent Marvel films get a big bump off The Avengers, the math will start to make more sense for Disney and Sony to make a deal. Everyone stands to benefit from it.

I imagine that Sony would want to get in on that Avengers hype/money. I see no reason why they wouldn't let Marvel use him in a movie. Also, there's the possibility that including him could boost the marketability of the Amazing Spider-Man film series. If subsequent Marvel films get a big bump off The Avengers, the math will start to make more sense for Disney and Sony to make a deal. Everyone stands to benefit from it.

How much money do you think Disney will be willing to give to Sony based on that if? And will that be enough for Sony to let them use Spider-Man?

It'd be different if Disney wasn't doing much better than Sony. But as is, Disney's in a position to logically give Sony peanuts for use of Spidey, and Sony wouldn't go for that.

Come on, Marvel does all the work, and Sony gets a cut - what's not to love from their point of view? That would seem like business sense to me.

But Venom you have to look at it from both angles. That's what me n the Doc were talking about. Read what you wrote again, but from Marvel's point of view. Do you really think that Marvel would even give one percent of their earnings to a rival company for doing nothing but asking for a cut? For use of a character? Good business for Sony, sure, but not so much, I think for Marvel.

But Venom you have to look at it from both angles. That's what me n the Doc were talking about. Read what you wrote again, but from Marvel's point of view. Do you really think that Marvel would even give one percent of their earnings to a rival company for doing nothing but asking for a cut? For use of a character? Good business for Sony, sure, but not so much, I think for Marvel.

Exactly.
There's no downside whatsoever for Marvel Studios, for Sony, or for the fans if Spidey exists in the MCU, and vice versa.

The only downside is there's no way in hell you can do this as a one-shot stunt....if the studios try to pull this off even as a 5-second cameo, then fans will be clamoring for more and more and more. Big can of worms there. (Or spiders.)

Exactly.
There's no downside whatsoever for Marvel Studios, for Sony, or for the fans if Spidey exists in the MCU, and vice versa.

The only downside is there's no way in hell you can do this as a one-shot stunt....if the studios try to pull this off even as a 5-second cameo, then fans will be clamoring for more and more and more. Big can of worms there. (Or spiders.)

Doesn't mean much if he makes less money than Avengers, or Iron Man domestically, for that matter.

Guys, unless there are people who went to see Spidey that didn't go to see Avengers, then adding him to Avengers does not increase the audience, and thus, doesn't increase revenue... but they'd still have to pay Sony? Bad deal.